Your partnership arrangement is that once they have bid 2 suits cues show, not ask for, stoppers in that suit.

I must say, 3NT looks like a completely normal punt to me. Sorry, I’ve added the information that opener showed support, which probably increases the chances of a spade lead. Clubs might break…and 5D is going to be way off, with 2 club losers and some if partner can’t help bolster your holding there.

Still, we played it on BBO and one of my esteemed opponents said to me, after my partner bid 3NT and made it opposite QJxxx diamonds and the ace of clubs, that ‘no bridge player in the world would bid 3NT with that hand’. Now, I’m sorry, I’m not trying to insult you guys all of whom quite like the bid. I’m with you! But I am pleased to see support for the idea…

Having said that, however, after the game I talked to David about it. It transpired he thought the opening bid was 1H, his double stopper. And there I was – and you all – supporting his thoughtful solution to the problem!

Like this:

Related

At first this looks like an obvious 2H
Now, I find this hard to answer without knowing your agreements after 1D–2C, a known problem sequence.

If 2D suggests extra length in diamonds and neither shows nor denies 4 cards in the major, because 2 of a major would show more than a minimum, what do you rebid with a minimum 4=4=4=1? Or would you not open 1D with that or if you do, do you still rebid 2D?

It is ominous that nobody bid spades, which makes it likely that partner has a minimum with long diamonds and 4 cards in spades.
If partner has a 4 card heart suit, s/he would also have to be minimum and somebody might have found a spade bid.

It seems much more likely that the hand is a misfit and a club partial may be our only plus score.

Maybe I am masterminding the hand, but I will give up more or less on hearts and bid 3C in preference to an “obvious” but game forcing 2H.

I do not understand the vitriolic attack on the 3NT bid. Maybe the comments are going through a sour grape filter.

Now that I know it is a support double, I think 3NT is even more attractive, particularly if they are playing the perverse form of support doubles where it just shows three card support (could be a weak NT playing Standard), which makes the club lead even less likely.

You see, kiddies, there’s this thing called a game bonus that you get when you try to take 9 tricks in NT …

I am going to follow through with the original plan of sorting out strain first by bidding 2H. If partner bids 2NT, I hope that 3C is non-forcing. If partner bids 3D I will probably wish that I worried more about level earlier in the auction. If partner bids 2S (FSF), I hope I can fend off the slam tries.

I should state that this is on the presumption that 2D is forcing. I cannot believe that as many as 50% of players (and perhaps 25% of the better players) in WA would play it as non-forcing, having to jump to 3D if they are worried about partner passing. If 2D is non-forcing, the opponents have values but seem to have not found a way into the auction with their spades, increasing the likelihood of this being a horrible misfit. I think in those circumstances I would bid 3C and hope to play it there.

I’ll abstain on the first problem, as I know the hand. However, I had a similar one at the SNOT. Non-vul, I held J10xx KJx void KQ9xxx. Partner opened 1D and I responded 2C and rebid 3C over partner’s 2NT (12-14). This turned out to be very wrong when partner held A983 Axxx Axx Jx. I was worried about being raised on 3 spades, if I responded 1S, and I thought 3S over 2NT was too much.

I’m getting to this late, so I’ve been left behind a bit. On the first hand, standard American methods don’t really let you bid 2C. Playing 2/1 game-forcing, I probably have 3C available (not forcing, invitational), but playing old-fashioned standard, I’d bid 1H. The bad news is when opener rebids 2D, you’re screwed. You probably have to pass, and you haven’t even mentioned your beautiful club suit.